Obama issues Dream Act (Amnesty) by executive order... press ignores!

[Steelplate]

Let me ask you daveman... why don't you give a fuck about the people's jobs outsourced by the conglomerate for $1 hour? Are you(and I know you are unemployed) willing to work for $1.50/hour?

You assholes want to blame EVERYONE but the real problem... is the Big business global monopoly. They got what they want.. an International Slave labor glut... at the expense of YOU YOURSELF and people like you Daveman... but you don't want to hear that do you?

I think you have that backwards. YOU want to blame everyone everyone but the real problem. I understand why. It's human nature to blame others for our problems.

and what is the real problem? I've explained my point of view... Business monopolies' and banking's greed... You just reversed it without explanation. You're one of the sheep that believe that anything not "Shiite right" is Communist/Marxist.

Congratulations... I bet Glenn Beck would die for a country full of your idiocy.

 

[The T]

Let me ask you daveman... why don't you give a fuck about the people's jobs outsourced by the conglomerate for $1 hour? Are you(and I know you are unemployed) willing to work for $1.50/hour?

You assholes want to blame EVERYONE but the real problem... is the Big business global monopoly. They got what they want.. an International Slave labor glut... at the expense of YOU YOURSELF and people like you Daveman... but you don't want to hear that do you?

Better yet PlasticPlate? WHY do you support a government that embellishes policies that cause these things to happen?

 

[Avatar4321]

I'm failing to see how a kid who was pulled across the border by his parents when he was eight and is now attending college is a threat to national security.

Well, I guess we should just ignore all threats you fail to see. That's very logical. Because there is no way there could possibly be a threat you don't see or comprehend. Clearly you know everything there has ever been to know. Your knowledge is clearly superior to everyone elses.

Now tell me all-seeing one. What are the lottery numbers for tomorrow?

Perhaps you'd care to explain what makes that person a security threat.

I don't know. Maybe the fact that they have no loyalty to the United States. That they have violated the law and being taught that violating the law is acceptable and should be rewarded. Perhaps because we are spending money we don't have to reward people who violate our laws.

I know this is difficult to understand for people who have no problem spending tons of money with no restraint, but overspending is a national security risk. One we are very likely to be dealing with on a major scale if we don't fix it.

In addition, there is the fact that it encourages violating more people to illegally enter the nation. An unsecure border, is in fact, a major national security issue.

And, of course, it's a complete slap in the face to all citizens of the United States, both natural born and naturalized to allow those who have no loyalty to the citizenry and who violate our laws to vote. It undermines the sovereignty of the people.

But of course, you don't see any of that, so we shouldnt be concerned at all with it. We should just blindly trust that the President knows what he is doing when he ignores Congress and enacts by fiat laws that they already voted against enacting. And there is obviously no threat to national security or the liberty of our nation when the executive overreaches in power to enforce his will contrary to that of the people.

 

[Avatar4321]

Let me ask you daveman... why don't you give a fuck about the people's jobs outsourced by the conglomerate for $1 hour? Are you(and I know you are unemployed) willing to work for $1.50/hour?

You assholes want to blame EVERYONE but the real problem... is the Big business global monopoly. They got what they want.. an International Slave labor glut... at the expense of YOU YOURSELF and people like you Daveman... but you don't want to hear that do you?

I think you have that backwards. YOU want to blame everyone everyone but the real problem. I understand why. It's human nature to blame others for our problems.

and what is the real problem? I've explained my point of view... Business monopolies' and banking's greed... You just reversed it without explanation. You're one of the sheep that believe that anything not "Shiite right" is Communist/Marxist.

Congratulations... I bet Glenn Beck would die for a country full of your idiocy.

I've never claimed that anything that isnt right is marxist. Straw man anyone?

And I've made it very obvious what the real problem is in my previous post. Not surprisingly you ignored it. As people generally do when their flaws are exposed.

 

[Polk]

Well, I guess we should just ignore all threats you fail to see. That's very logical. Because there is no way there could possibly be a threat you don't see or comprehend. Clearly you know everything there has ever been to know. Your knowledge is clearly superior to everyone elses.

Now tell me all-seeing one. What are the lottery numbers for tomorrow?

Perhaps you'd care to explain what makes that person a security threat.

I don't know. Maybe the fact that they have no loyalty to the United States. That they have violated the law and being taught that violating the law is acceptable and should be rewarded. Perhaps because we are spending money we don't have to reward people who violate our laws.

I know this is difficult to understand for people who have no problem spending tons of money with no restraint, but overspending is a national security risk. One we are very likely to be dealing with on a major scale if we don't fix it.

In addition, there is the fact that it encourages violating more people to illegally enter the nation. An unsecure border, is in fact, a major national security issue.

And, of course, it's a complete slap in the face to all citizens of the United States, both natural born and naturalized to allow those who have no loyalty to the citizenry and who violate our laws to vote. It undermines the sovereignty of the people.

But of course, you don't see any of that, so we shouldnt be concerned at all with it. We should just blindly trust that the President knows what he is doing when he ignores Congress and enacts by fiat laws that they already voted against enacting. And there is obviously no threat to national security or the liberty of our nation when the executive overreaches in power to enforce his will contrary to that of the people.

So much wrong with that post that I don't know where to begin.

 

[Salt Jones]

If you pay taxes Illegals are getting paid by you.

So are meth heads, white supremacists, black racists, conservatives, socialists and others. I'd rather work with illegals then the previously mentioned.

99% of conservatives wouldn't take a dime from the taxpayers..

Illegals rape the taxpayers, minorities as well..

Its no secret that democrats PAY minorities and illegals with entitlements to VOTE DEMOCRAT...

99%? Really? Then why are conservatives up in arms about Paul Ryan's plan for medicare? Can you provide links to your claims or are you just full of shit? I bet on the latter.

 

[Oddball]

Care to explain why you want to award criminals in a bad economy when 20 plus percent of Americans are out of work?

Because they'll eventually vote Democrat, with or without citizenship.

The left has thrown national security under the bus in favor of political power.

I'm failing to see how a kid who was pulled across the border by his parents when he was eight and is now attending college is a threat to national security.

What your failing to see is that ruling by decree is utterly despotic.

But I guess as long as the despot carries that (D) by their name, it's all peace and love beads, innit?

 

[Avatar4321]

So much wrong with that post that I don't know where to begin.

Experience tells me when you don't know where to begin it's because you can't figure out what's wrong.

 

[The T]

Perhaps you'd care to explain what makes that person a security threat.

I don't know. Maybe the fact that they have no loyalty to the United States. That they have violated the law and being taught that violating the law is acceptable and should be rewarded. Perhaps because we are spending money we don't have to reward people who violate our laws.

I know this is difficult to understand for people who have no problem spending tons of money with no restraint, but overspending is a national security risk. One we are very likely to be dealing with on a major scale if we don't fix it.

In addition, there is the fact that it encourages violating more people to illegally enter the nation. An unsecure border, is in fact, a major national security issue.

And, of course, it's a complete slap in the face to all citizens of the United States, both natural born and naturalized to allow those who have no loyalty to the citizenry and who violate our laws to vote. It undermines the sovereignty of the people.

But of course, you don't see any of that, so we shouldnt be concerned at all with it. We should just blindly trust that the President knows what he is doing when he ignores Congress and enacts by fiat laws that they already voted against enacting. And there is obviously no threat to national security or the liberty of our nation when the executive overreaches in power to enforce his will contrary to that of the people.

So much wrong with that post that I don't know where to begin.

Just item by item...or is this an admission you've been caught and have no answer?

 

[Salt Jones]

The kicker is - the strong majority of illegals DON'T EVEN PAY FOR THEIR OWN TUITION - THE TAXPAYERS DO VIA GOVERNMENT GRANTS...

Vote Ron Paul, he will deport all these illegal fucks that steal our jobs and our money...

They aren't stealing my job or money. You need to be US citizen for my job.

Oh, well, then fuck everybody else, then, huh? You got yours. That's all that matters, right?

Is that some of that famous liberal compassion at work?

I don't believe in compassion and me getting mine is all that matters. It's my job to provide for my family, everyone else needs to take care of themselves.

 

[Polk]

So much wrong with that post that I don't know where to begin.

Experience tells me when you don't know where to begin it's because you can't figure out what's wrong.

1. It's a pretty radical claim to say the child broke the law when his parents pulled him across the border.

2. The point about spending is:
a) a strawman
b) a total non-sequitur

3. Saying we should do more to secure the border (a point I agree with you on) is also a non-sequitur. Punching a kid in the face doesn't do anything to secure the border.

4. Since the person in question is not a citizen, they're not allowed to vote.

 

[Salt Jones]

Because they'll eventually vote Democrat, with or without citizenship.

The left has thrown national security under the bus in favor of political power.

I'm failing to see how a kid who was pulled across the border by his parents when he was eight and is now attending college is a threat to national security.

What your failing to see is that ruling by decree is utterly despotic.

But I guess as long as the despot carries that (D) by their name, it's all peace and love beads, innit?

How many of the previous 13,000 plus executive orders do you have a problem with?

 

[Polk]

Because they'll eventually vote Democrat, with or without citizenship.

The left has thrown national security under the bus in favor of political power.

I'm failing to see how a kid who was pulled across the border by his parents when he was eight and is now attending college is a threat to national security.

What your failing to see is that ruling by decree is utterly despotic.

But I guess as long as the despot carries that (D) by their name, it's all peace and love beads, innit?

Where's the decree? This is entirely within the legal prerogative of the executive.

 

[Avatar4321]

I don't believe in compassion and me getting mine is all that matters. It's my job to provide for my family, everyone else needs to take care of themselves.

Well, that explains why you don't mind illegal immigration. I don't understand how a single compassionate person could support a system that allows illegal immigration considering how those poor people are exploited and abused.

All because politicians want to create chaos and get more votes. Disgusting.

 

[Avatar4321]

I'm failing to see how a kid who was pulled across the border by his parents when he was eight and is now attending college is a threat to national security.

What your failing to see is that ruling by decree is utterly despotic.

But I guess as long as the despot carries that (D) by their name, it's all peace and love beads, innit?

Where's the decree? This is entirely within the legal prerogative of the executive.

Since when is it the prerogative of the executive to enact laws that Congress specifically voted against enacting?

We live in a Republic. Not a Despotism. Not a totalitarian regime. Not a Monarchy.

 

[Avatar4321]

So much wrong with that post that I don't know where to begin.

Experience tells me when you don't know where to begin it's because you can't figure out what's wrong.

1. It's a pretty radical claim to say the child broke the law when his parents pulled him across the border.

2. The point about spending is:
a) a strawman
b) a total non-sequitur

3. Saying we should do more to secure the border (a point I agree with you on) is also a non-sequitur. Punching a kid in the face doesn't do anything to secure the border.

4. Since the person in question is not a citizen, they're not allowed to vote.

So you really don't realize that overspending is a national security issue do you?

Rewarding those who cross the border illegally does not secure the border. It does the exact opposite.

The Dream Act was an amnesty bill. The whole reason politicians want amnesty bills is to create more registered voters. Citizenship is the goal.

 

[Polk]

What your failing to see is that ruling by decree is utterly despotic.

But I guess as long as the despot carries that (D) by their name, it's all peace and love beads, innit?

Where's the decree? This is entirely within the legal prerogative of the executive.

Since when is it the prerogative of the executive to enact laws that Congress specifically voted against enacting?

We live in a Republic. Not a Despotism. Not a totalitarian regime. Not a Monarchy.

He's not enacting a law. He's giving direction to executive branch agencies.

 

[Salt Jones]

I don't believe in compassion and me getting mine is all that matters. It's my job to provide for my family, everyone else needs to take care of themselves.

Well, that explains why you don't mind illegal immigration. I don't understand how a single compassionate person could support a system that allows illegal immigration considering how those poor people are exploited and abused.

All because politicians want to create chaos and get more votes. Disgusting.

Then why does the US Chamber of Commerce support illegal immigration? What do the Republican business owners get out of it? I thought Mexicans were against gay marriage, abortion and deeply Catholic, why aren't they Republicans?

 

[Oddball]

I'm failing to see how a kid who was pulled across the border by his parents when he was eight and is now attending college is a threat to national security.

What your failing to see is that ruling by decree is utterly despotic.

But I guess as long as the despot carries that (D) by their name, it's all peace and love beads, innit?

Where's the decree? This is entirely within the legal prerogative of the executive.

If BOOOOOSH! or anyone else without the (D) did this, you'd be howling like a cat that got its tail caught in the rocking chair, and we both know it.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Obama issues Dream Act (Amnesty) by executive order... press ignores!

Could that be because the Administration did nothing illegal, unethical, or otherwise immoral?

Indeed, the EO comports to Constitutional case law. In Weber v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co (1971), the court held that children may not be punished for the bad acts of their parent(s). It is not the fault of these students that they were brought to the US illegally, and it is un-Constitutional to suggest they should be punished as a result.

And for children brought to the United States before the age of reason, who have known only this country, where would you recommend they be deported? A birth country that is alien to them, where they have no family, no means of support, and perhaps don’t even know the language?

Given these and other considerations, the EO is both appropriate and necessary.

They will never be shipped out and there is no such thing as the "anchor baby program". It's called the 14th amendment and it won't be changed. Notice how the Republicans in Congress have stopped talking about that?

True, there is no such thing as an ‘anchor baby,’ per the cited case above and Plyler v Doe (1982).

You think bringing facts into this is going to convince them?

No. But there are those with relatively open minds who read the threads and don’t subscribe.